You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Dear forum members,
Eupedia moved to a new server last week. If the forum tells you that the page has unsafe scripts, or if anything doesn't work properly on the forum, just clear your browser cache and cookies and everything should go back to normal.

out of 17 names you mention as typical slavic, in Serbian only Mirko, Vladimir, Radoslav, Budimir and Ljubomir exist.....

and split was not nearly so long as times of Scythians
link you give is to names of Sarmatians and I have explained that Scythians and Sarmatians are likely to have spoken different languages.. with Sarmatian considered iranic....

In all of these po or pot are prepositions, the rest is the root. It denotes done function. What's left is tamaniti, topiti, paliti. Not sure of pato in patosirati.
Most likely "pata" is the root in Scythian.

howver, in "potopiti" "po" is not proposition as "topiti" means to melt...and "opiti" to get drunk
it is related to word "potop" which is a giant flood..kind of end of world flood.... "poplava" is flood
"potop"is massive killing extinction event... by water

knowing that in PIE water is also *ap and *uop
I think it makes sense that potop = pot + op = killing +water
"pot" would be here used to describe a kind of water with key property that it kills....
its not killing as noun but killing as adjective
which is exactly what we have in description of Amazones -type of woman that is described as man/warrior killing

I'm pretty sure "topit" is the root in verb. Topiti, should be the action of drowning, either self of someone. Potopiti, means that action was done, as with "potop" ( po-top, with "po" meaning "after" in slavic), or emphasizes the meaning of action. Of course there are other derivatives of the same root, but it's just the complication of live language.

Slavic names: I'm not sure if you got all of them right, but surely from the list of hundreds of Scythian names, there will be few coincidental. Also few slavic will show up too, as we know slavs where "citizens" of Scythia and Sarmatia (depending on time period). What I meant, generally speaking, is that majority of names are not Slavic. It means that in their origin and heritage Scythians or Sarmatians were not Slavs.

My conclusion was that, to explain persistence and uniformity of slavic language over vast territory, slavic needed to be a universal language of all the tribes that took part in slavic expansion. The territory that they conquered was vast, from Baltic Sea to the Mediterranean, from central europe to Ural Mountains (almost), that's half of the Europe. And they came from unknown place, and nobody heard of them before. That's like a miracle, lol.
Following this thought, I started leaning into direction of known political entity, to be a starting point, and fairly big one. Having a clue where the (topological) homeland of slavs could be, and some clues from history and legends, the homeland landed in area known as Sarmatia. Some other historical facts and Sarmatians names, lead me to conclusion, that Sarmatians where the ruling class only, over the Slavs. So at the end Sarmatians needed to be slavinized in order to achieve the cultural and linguistic unity of all Slavs before spreading around.

So even though we find only few Slavic names on list of Sarmatian names, even at the 4th century of CE, they were already Slavs. The most of the names are of royal families anyway. So even if they were Slavinized, they still used traditional royal Sarmatian names. You know, it's the tradition after all, and tradition is always strong and conservative.

I'm pretty sure "topit" is the root in verb. Topiti, should be the action of drowning, either self of someone. Potopiti, means that action was done, as with "potop" ( po-top, with "po" meaning "after" in slavic), or emphasizes the meaning of action. Of course there are other derivatives of the same root, but it's just the complication of live language.

not quite, but you are right that 'pot' is not related to 'pat' of Scythians

so, i think pot/pod is abbreviated form of "ispod" (under)
op is from PIE *uop, *ap for water
so "potop" = under water
"potopiti" = to put under water

Slavic names: I'm not sure if you got all of them right, but surely from the list of hundreds of Scythian names, there will be few coincidental. Also few slavic will show up too, as we know slavs where "citizens" of Scythia and Sarmatia (depending on time period). What I meant, generally speaking, is that majority of names are not Slavic. It means that in their origin and heritage Scythians or Sarmatians were not Slavs.

those were Sarmatian names not Schytian... the two are not the same.... their languages and personal names were very likely different....

My conclusion was that, to explain persistence and uniformity of slavic language over vast territory, slavic needed to be a universal language of all the tribes that took part in slavic expansion. The territory that they conquered was vast, from Baltic Sea to the Mediterranean, from central europe to Ural Mountains (almost), that's half of the Europe. And they came from unknown place, and nobody heard of them before. That's like a miracle, lol.
Following this thought, I started leaning into direction of known political entity, to be a starting point, and fairly big one. Having a clue where the (topological) homeland of slavs could be, and some clues from history and legends, the homeland landed in area known as Sarmatia. Some other historical facts and Sarmatians names, lead me to conclusion, that Sarmatians where the ruling class only, over the Slavs. So at the end Sarmatians needed to be slavinized in order to achieve the cultural and linguistic unity of all Slavs before spreading around.

yes, i agree with that...
but what people were that substratum living in European Sarmatia?

Not sure who was exactly in substratum except Slavs (I2a and R1a) and possibly some Sarmatians. The rest of them got slavonized quickly right after expansion. The reason might have been the huge depopulation of Central Europe just before expansion. Plus possibly Slavs fighting beside Huns (Atilla) and then Alans and Avars, and slowly started spreading hundred years earlier?
After the expansion the old tribes were totaly gone, except Greeks (not very good agricultural land, which was important for farmer slavs), Albanians and some mountain herders like many Vlachs (again not attractive terrain for Slavs), Vlachs in Romania (don't know why?, some mountains and possibly due to frequent migratory route to panonia valley), and Panonia/Hungary (though perfec agricultural land, it was also a perfect spot for any hunic and turkic/nomadic tribes that till 10 century kept lending there all the time.
It still eludes me why Slavs remained strongly segregated I2a and R1a but managed linguistic and cultural unity? If I didn't know about diversity center of I2a Dinaric in Sarmatia, I would claim that I2a was always in Balkans, and only R1a would be originally slavic. That would simplify things.
Is there a good I2a Dinaric map, or even better South Dinaric?

3) if Σκωλοτοι name that Herodotus use are the scythians could it be the later Sclavini?

4) modern Germanic are the Hannover western forms of German
could Germanic Baltic Slavic and Albanian origin from a common language?
their grammar and vocabulary show that they had similar past and process, comparing the Greek Sanshqrit etc

5) If Sarmatians were an elite and Slavs existed at the time of Herodotus would herodotus just mention them? at least a small history about them?

6) many Uralic Turkic people enter Moravia before the known Great Moravia, why the genetical data did not change?
could the same happened with Slavic population at the 'traditional' Historical stories?

7) if Slavic are R1a (z496 I think) why in Greece R1a exists in high mountainous areas and not in Valleys since Slavs took all the best fields?

Not sure who was exactly in substratum except Slavs (I2a and R1a) and possibly some Sarmatians. The rest of them got slavonized quickly right after expansion. The reason might have been the huge depopulation of Central Europe just before expansion. Plus possibly Slavs fighting beside Huns (Atilla) and then Alans and Avars, and slowly started spreading hundred years earlier?
After the expansion the old tribes were totaly gone, except Greeks (not very good agricultural land, which was important for farmer slavs), Albanians and some mountain herders like many Vlachs (again not attractive terrain for Slavs), Vlachs in Romania (don't know why?, some mountains and possibly due to frequent migratory route to panonia valley), and Panonia/Hungary (though perfec agricultural land, it was also a perfect spot for any hunic and turkic/nomadic tribes that till 10 century kept lending there all the time.
It still eludes me why Slavs remained strongly segregated I2a and R1a but managed linguistic and cultural unity? If I didn't know about diversity center of I2a Dinaric in Sarmatia, I would claim that I2a was always in Balkans, and only R1a would be originally slavic. That would simplify things.
Is there a good I2a Dinaric map, or even better South Dinaric?

Who said that Slavs did not enter Greece,
they manage even to settle in Peloponese as few toponymes show,
simply they did not manage to conquer Greece,
Dusan Serbia Cymeon Bulgaria are know that they enter Greece and hold areas for few decades,
Simply Greeks resist more than in other parts of balkans, and since they had alphabet they did not get Slavic culture,
after centuries of battles wars and peace treatment there was a zone of mixed population around today borders
(example the Florina-Lerin and Bitola-Monasterion) that starts from upper Makedonia until Black Sea shores (agathoupolis-ahtopol etc)

now about Romania has Slavic marker, I2 if -Din is Slavic, but kept Romano-Latin, although Severi pass through her lands, it seems that Moesian Vlachs as also some byzantine ports and cities show resist (like Akkerman castle story).
remember Greek revolt did not start at today Greece but in Romanian city Ias

PS Interesting case is Crimea which even today is not considered as pure Slavic land although in heart of Slavic lands,

maybe Scythians were PIE speaking people...
and were later absorbed by Slavs

3) if Σκωλοτοι name that Herodotus use are the scythians could it be the later Sclavini?

maybe

4) modern Germanic are the Hannover western forms of German
could Germanic Baltic Slavic and Albanian origin from a common language?
their grammar and vocabulary show that they had similar past and process, comparing the Greek Sanshqrit etc

5) If Sarmatians were an elite and Slavs existed at the time of Herodotus would herodotus just mention them? at least a small history about them?

maybe under other names,,,

6) many Uralic Turkic people enter Moravia before the known Great Moravia, why the genetical data did not change?
could the same happened with Slavic population at the 'traditional' Historical stories?

those Turkic may have been R1a as well
alternatively, they didnot leave much offshot...
it is not rare to see in Czech or Slovakia somewhat slanted eyes...

7) if Slavic are R1a (z496 I think) why in Greece R1a exists in high mountainous areas and not in Valleys since Slavs took all the best fields?

not all R1a is Slavic,,,,
and south Slavic may have been dominantly I2a-din

*suerb = border people is close to your earlier assumptions that it means just warriors
i remember reading (do not know source) that in Russia serb meant soldier....

interesting with this respect is different meaning of word bojar in slavic countries...
in Serbia it is warrior class... in other Slavs it is wealthy person....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bojar

root word is boj = battle

border people are warriors in war and merchants in peace....in peace they are bridge between different cultures... merchants are wealthy people...

hence Sart in Asia as name for merchants...

*suerb = turn and *uend = turn
can also indicate not just place where to turn (border, (u)end) but also people who are bilingual and of mixed origin and change language when usage of other language is more adventageous...naturally bilingual border people can "turn" to one side, to one of languages and cultures when that becomes adventageous...

hence Siraces (considered by some to origin from Caucasian Serboi) on Black sea as most hellenized of Sarmatians,...they were known as merchants....

hence many Wends(Sorbs) easily becomming Germans in east Germany...(Leibniz is most notable example of German with Sorbian roots)

I can imagine Scordisci being both Celtic and proto-Slavic speakers.... when pushed by Roman empire, they resist for a while and than move to north, to area from Bohemia where they go as Celtic to area of Caarpathians where they go as Slavic...part of them that stays in Serbia is absorbed by roman empire, hence romanized (and giving Vlachs) and in Srem are they fall under Sarmatian Iazyges (two classes exist in their society - lower class called "serfs")
when Celtic language lose its advantage due to Gauls being romanized, they drop Celtic language and become Slavic only....I would note here that west parts of Bohemia where we find toponyms related to Serbs also has increased I2a-din (3 times compared to the rest of Czech republic),,, DAI (De administrando Imperio) places white Serbia in land Boiki which can be mapped only to Bohemia....it states it is also where they originally come from... which makes sense as origin place of I2a-din

there is one big difference between contemporary Serbs and Croats - Serbs easily adapt international words, Croats defend their language by inventing own words for new technological terms.....

Croats do not really fit in oriignally Balkan people...they are too white for Mediterranean people... I would rather relate proto-Croats to Carpii or Sarmatians originally and to R1a (and I2a-din north ) and leave possibility that I2a-Din south (along with I2a din - north) was in Balkan as Illyrians and Scordisci...Nordvedt estimates of age of haplogroups are way too strict...they are never adapted by official science... according to official method age of I2a-Din in Serbia is 9000 year old... ("High levels of Paleolithic Y-chromosome lineages characterize Serbia"-Maria Regueiro, Luis Rivera, Tatjana Damnjanovic, Ljiljana Lukovic, Jelena Milasin, Rene J. Herrera) ..Scordisci also explain why i2a-din south is rare in east Europe east of Danube, but appears in line from Balkan to Denmark...in Slovakia I2a-din is much larger in Vlach settlers from Romania than in native Slovak people...if you look at Carpi on euratlas maps it is notable that they move to west from Black sea to Carpathians, even before Huns enter from east...with arrival of Huns they are likely to go more to west and into Carpatians....hence white (west) Croatia in west Carpatians, more precisely in south Poland and Slovakia....both Serbs and Croats from white Serbia and white Croatia are in DAI said to have been called white there, which I explained with misunderstanding of *uend (border people) with Celtic word *windo = white and by white (west) designation in name of their countries...

Scordisci and Carpi can both fit into Danubian Slavs from Russian primary chronicle that move to north when being pushed by expanding Roman empire..Russian primary chronicle explicitly mention Serbs, Croats and Carantines among those Danubian Slavs,,,,, Carantines could origin from slavicized Carni...

note also that mediating between different cultures and being bilingual could have been a way for I2a people to survive arrival of new people in Europe...

in that respect curious is also that Serbs are only nation that uses both cirillyc and latin alphabets....

this is offtopic... maybe admins can put it somewhere else on other subforum...

Originally Posted by zanipolo

correct me if I am wrong but croats and slovenes use only Latin Alphabet and any cyrillic usage was forced on them during the Tito days

They may have had in schools few text written in Cyrillic, like we had few texts in Slovenian and Macedonian. But as far as I know press and books in Slovenia and Croatia were always in latin alphabet, while in Serbia both alphabets were used... it may be that in Croatia there was some cyrillyc used, but note that before wars in one thrid of Croatia Serbs were relative or absolute majority. In fact, this already shows what nations were favored in communism. North and south of Serbia were made autonomous provinces but third of Croatia populated with Serbs was not.

Tito was half-Croat, half-Slovenian. Nothing was ever imposed on Croats and Slovenians in ex-Yugoslavia. Those kind of stories were just their 90s media manipulation of own and foreign public in order to justify separation. To create desire to separate you need to blame others for own problems, to create fear, anger, illusion of not being fairly threated, which was process that happened in medias in all republics (Serbia included) in years before wars started...... that's the inner manipulation.... on other hand to achieve international support for separatism you need to back it up with strong arguments.... hence all the black-white stories....

Yugoslavia was fairly good country for all of its ordinary people while Tito was alive. Living standard was better than today.One would typically do school and than get from state job and apartment according to his education and importance for society.

It was not easy to manage Yugoslavia as it was typically taken too much care that less populous nations were feeling that they are fairly dealt with. So e.g. in sport attempt was to always have in national team sportsman from all nations, which was sometimes artificial. Another thing is that there was fund for less developed as in EU. So typically Slovenia, Croatia, north Serbia (it was not republic but autonomous province) and central Serbia would put money in that fond, and it would go mostly to Kosovo (south autonomous province of Serbia), next to Macedonia, Montenegro and Bosnia...

People who had problems were those who were collaborating with Nazis during the ww2, the ones who were pro-Russian in years immediatelly after ww2 (when Tito separated from east block and was in constant fear of attack), those who criticized the system too much around year 1968 (but those were typically intellectuals who didnot go to jail but their carrier was jeopardized) and nationalists. Problem is that with fall of communism, those few people who were in fact rightfully persecuted for nationalism came to be politically very influential (Tudjman in Croatia, Izetbegovic in Bosnia, Seselj in Serbia)...

[QUOTE=Yetos;395806]Seven notices that the author of the tread must check

YETOS: 4) modern Germanic are the Hannover western forms of German
could Germanic Baltic Slavic and Albanian origin from a common language?
their grammar and vocabulary show that they had similar past and process, comparing the Greek Sanshqrit etc

it is without big importance for this thread but let's note that 'deutsche' official language of today is not from a Hannover dialect - it 's an articial making of the XVI° century (after the printing invention) attempting to unify the regional "chancelleries" super-dialectal scriptae, and is based on the middle-late high germanic (= south), with some mixture of middle (geography) german dialects: the result is an heterogneous and phonetically illogical enough language, when compared to german dialects -
the only tight link of german language to baltic, slavic and other satem language (in the sense of common origin opposed to contacts or loans) is as all the I-Ean languages, the original I-Ean -
If I believe my last readings, old contacts OR INFLUENCES between germanic and balto-slavic languages seam attested (maybe before complete satemisation, but same contacts seam attested too with germanic and old italic or proto-italic languages) - albanian language would have been very close to balto-slavic languages in a first stage as the illyrian, thracian, dardanian & etc... (West satem) ones - what would be interesting is knowing where and when exactly these contacts OR CONTACTS WITH AN ARCHAIC PROTO SATEM LANGUAGE took place: we could imagine the "Corded" period, or before? (the italic contacts appears being older to scholars)

YETOS: 4) modern Germanic are the Hannover western forms of German
could Germanic Baltic Slavic and Albanian origin from a common language?
their grammar and vocabulary show that they had similar past and process, comparing the Greek Sanshqrit etc

it is without big importance for this thread but let's note that 'deutsche' official language of today is not from a Hannover dialect - it 's an articial making of the XVI° century (after the printing invention) attempting to unify the regional "chancelleries" super-dialectal scriptae, and is based on the middle-late high germanic (= south), with some mixture of middle (geography) german dialects: the result is an heterogneous and phonetically illogical enough language, when compared to german dialects -
the only tight link of german language to baltic, slavic and other satem language (in the sense of common origin opposed to contacts or loans) is as all the I-Ean languages, the original I-Ean -
If I believe my last readings, old contacts OR INFLUENCES between germanic and balto-slavic languages seam attested (maybe before complete satemisation, but same contacts seam attested too with germanic and old italic or proto-italic languages) - albanian language would have been very close to balto-slavic languages in a first stage as the illyrian, thracian, dardanian & etc... (West satem) ones - what would be interesting is knowing where and when exactly these contacts OR CONTACTS WITH AN ARCHAIC PROTO SATEM LANGUAGE took place: we could imagine the "Corded" period, or before? (the italic contacts appears being older to scholars)

I think that is Goethe the one who standarize Deutsch and the dialect that is known as hannover,
although I might be wrong.
my mistake is that German Languages are not only the Deutsch.
All I want to say when I post it, is that they share a common progress timing era. Something like a split happened to them same time from a common language,
if you notice IE languages, Vocabulary and Grammar show their connections and relations,